This is nuts--would they prefer those homeless camp somewhere that they're NOT welcome? It's not as if the city would be free of homeless people if they succeed in stopping this one guy from hostinghttps://twitter.com/schmangee/status/1052552712720670721 …
dude we have plenty of homeless in my city and I take the bus to work and deal with them every day: I'm not a fan. But they are *already* here and *already* make neighbors suffer even w/o a guy playing host. I'd rather they all have somewhere to be which they'll actually go to.
-
-
If this man can't manage them, he'll figure that out, and the city will be back to square one (Akron isn't exactly a lovely place to begin with--lotta desperation there from what I can tell). If he can, so much the better for everyone except the immediately adjacent houses.
-
They can be arrested for loitering, being drunk in public, and a myriad of other crimes when in public spaces. You set a horrible precedent by allowing emotions to sway you in this case because you just know NGOs will set up legal "safe houses" to ruin previously nice areas
-
This isn't about emotions, it's about pragmatism: arresting people for nuisance stuff like that never puts them away for good, and rarely puts them away for more than a night. Then they're right back at it again. I see it every day: I would 100% prefer someone take them in
-
As for NGO "safe houses" what exactly do you think shelters are? Do you think people don't oppose those too? I don't ultimately care where they stay so long as they're off the street: if shelters can't accomplish this, I don't see a problem with letting a volunteer try instead
-
Because of zoning. Certain areas are zone that only a set number of people can live in a square acreage. Do you want New Dehli in the suburbs and rural areas of America? If you can't fix a problem then you keep it contained.
-
Ya funny story, the expenses that zoning laws add to homeownership and renting are a huge factor in why so many people can't get a place to live in the first place. Allow smaller houses, closer together--you can go pretty far in that direction w/o turning into India
-
Again, this is about pragmatism: do you want fewer homeless people on the street or not? If zoning both contributes to homelessness AND fails to keep them out of your neighborhood, it needs to be fixed
-
It will result in shittier situation for people who saved up enough to buy a house in the suburbs or rural area. I refuse to sacrifice that. I would rather have homeless people on the streets
- 5 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.